Friday, September 17, 2010

What do you do when the public polls are showing you're getting hammered?

Make one up!

In a move even more desperately transparent thank Mary Jo Kilroy's congressional hearings on Lehman Brothers, Ted Strickland released his own internal poll showing him....losing.

You can imagine the conversation in the Strickland War Room...

Staffer 1: We're getting smoked. What can we do?
Staffer 3: Hide?
Staffer 4: Don't bother me. I'm tweeting.
Staffer 1: Damn it, Lis! This is serious. We need something. Something creative.
Staffer 2: WALL STREET!
Staffer 3: Make up our own poll?
Staffer 4: [tap tap tappity tap]
Staffer 1: Pay attention, Lis. Anyways, I do like that other idea....make up our own poll. So what do you think? We're up 4, maybe 5 points?
Staffer 2: GREEEED!!!
Staffer 3: Too obvious. How about we're down, but just by a tiny bit?
Staffer 4: Oh. Em. Gee. I just was retweeted! I love that!
Staffer 1: [stares blankly at Staffer 4 for 30 seconds] Ok. We'll say we're up 3. Now we need to get a particularly legitimate pollster so the press will fall for this one. Any suggestions?
Staffer 2: GOLDEN PARACHUTE!!!!!
Staffer 1: Shut up, Sandy.
Staffer 3: I've got a friend. Diane Feldman. Her name even sounds smart.
Staffer 4: What are we talking about?
Staffer 1: [bangs head on table]

And what did we get out of it all? Diane Feldman. The Strickland campaign's Making Numbers Up Czar submitted an e-mail about the numbers that read as follows:
“Voters’ perceptions of Strickland reflect their upset at economic conditions but his personal imagery remains strong...”
A pollster that doesn't know the difference between "they're" and "their". Brilliant.

Folks, the aggregate of all polls show John Kasich is up 10.3%.

That will fluctuate. It's bound to. Ultimately, Ohio is a purple state.

So keep pounding away. Making the calls. Knocking on doors. Contributing the cash.

We gotta win on 11.2.10.

UPDATE: A commenter believes the poll is legit because Matt at Right Ohio wrote about an internal Strickland poll on September 2nd. Matt highlighted an internal memo from Strickland campaign manager Aaron Pickrell written on September 1st and stating their polling "in the last two weeks" showed Strickland down 3.

Uh oh. Looks like the above internal poll is legit!

Except it's not.

From my original link:
Former Cong. John Kasich (R) led Strickland 48%-45% in large sample of 1,200 likely voters conducted September 7-9 and 12-14 by the Feldman Group.
September 7-9 and 12-14?

So they had two more spaced out polls that came out about a month after the other poll that just so happened to ALSO show a Strickland deficit of 3? Wow. This race isn't changing one bit, is it?

This couldn't look more transparent if they tried.


  1. Awww, a nice picture of Teddy and his pal Bamster on Hot Air today.

  2. If Strickland made up that poll, he must have been psychic. Because Matt Naugle wrote about a Strickland campaign email claiming a three-point race over two weeks ago:

    Wanna try again?

  3. Hey, maybe it's a perception thing, but I think they really meant to say "their."

    As in "I really want to express my upset."

    Yeah, it's not traditionally grammatical, but the Dems are all about change.

    My upset, your upset, their upset.

    John Kasich will display his upset in November.

  4. Except that the memo you cite also says its the latest in their TRACKING poll.

    Idiot. By proving that more than one internal poll exists that showed it was a three point race it's getting even harder to prove your ridiculous "made it up" story.

    Unless you think they went back in time and created a paper trail of tracking polls. I guess there's THAT possibility.

  5. LOL!!!!

    Even when completely pwned, Modern is in total denial.

    Of COURSE they say they are tracking polls. They have to look legit, right?

    Just admit it. You got schooled. You said the poll Matt talked about was the one with the 3 point lead.

    If you guys are gonna make numbers up to cover your butt, at least play with the numbers a bit. Say a four point deficit, or something.


  6. Um, you really need to switch to decaf.

    Fine, you've changed your story from they made up to one poll to making up two. Fine.

    Where's your proof? Because not you, or anyone else here, or Jai Chabra called the results of that poll two weeks ago "made up."

    You have no credibility left Keeling. You claimed a DGA event NEVER mentioned Ohio, and yet video surfaced that showed you couldn't have been more wrong.

    You claimed that Yvette McGee-Brown said something about gun rights, only to have to backpedal when the video surficed.

    You OUTRIGHT fabricated a quote by Redfern in a media interview when he said the exact opposite.

    Now, you're claiming that Strickland internal poll was made up. Oh, and so was that other one... You're a pathetic and shameless liar, Keeling.

    You know you're lying. And so does everyone else.

    I guess Strickland made up the CNN/Time, Fox News, and Rasmussen polls, too? Oh yeah, I bet they did!

  7. Ah, the glory of progressive debate....distort reality and attack the opponent rather than debate the facts.

    A classic tactic.

    Shameless, you are.

    Your denial of the reality of the race is getting downright pathetic. You cherry pick polls to prove your point.

    An aggregate of ALL polls show Ted is down 10.3%.

    With that in mind, I guess I can understand your desperation. It's all too transparent.

  8. "distort reality and attack the opponent rather than debate the facts."

    That's an odd response for me simply asking you to prove your claim that these polls are just simply made up... you attacked me.

    You have an odd sense of irony.

    I'm not cherry picking polls.

    You're obsessing over a Quinnpiac poll while ignore three other polls that show a vastly different result. You're ignoring that Rasmussen shows the race has tightened by half in a week.

    And you're ignoring the obvious errors in Quinny's likely voter model.

    You're making baseless allegations with no proof. When confronted with evidence that pokes a hole in your story, you just simply expand your b.s. conspiracy theory.

    When asked for proof you attack me.

    You want to bank on the aggregate that includes some obvious junk data (with the divergence on the polling, clearly SOMEONE much be very much wrong), you go ahead chuckles.

    But nobody honestly believes this is a ten-point race. You have to rely on a flawed Quinnipiac and a historically mocked Dispatch poll to get to that aggregate. Go ahead. Believe it.

    But quit making up allegations you cannot prove, you lying hack.

  9. Obsessing over a Quinnipiac poll? Link?

    I have repeatedly said all polls must be considered in the aggregate.

    No sane polling analyst would back your position of cherry picking the polls most friendly to your side.

    None. No one.

    If you want to rely on a Rasmussen poll that you have so often derided as b.s., that's up to you.

    It's foolish, but it's up to you.

  10. You don't cherry pick?

    Let's see: Four tweets on the favorable SurveyUSA post. Nothing on the results on the CNN/Time or Fox News polls. Not a tweet on the result of the Rasmussen, which is rare for you.

    For the first time ALL CYCLE, you DIDN'T write a post specifically on Rasmussen, although you did write about Quinnipiac a poll you called "unreliable" when it showed Strickland ahead.

    You wrote an entire post today based on nothing more than the poll data from Quinnipiac.

    And you say you don't cherry pick?


  11. I guess Strickland made up the CNN/Time, Fox News, and Rasmussen polls, too? Oh yeah, I bet they did!

    You're really crowing about polls showing Ted down "only" 7?



  12. Considering how the most recent Rassmussen poll was within the margin of error of the previous one I don't think much has really changed in the two weeks. After all those ads Ted got a slight bump. I guess we'll see what happens next. I think all of you guys get too excited.


No profanity, keep it clean.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.